Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

I bet you didnt know that

Options
1326327329331332334

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,193 ✭✭✭TomSweeney


    That’s the reason alright. And it works.

    Anybody who knows America knows that if an item has a sticker price of 2 dollars you don’t just hand over 2 dollars, not in most states anyway. The tax is calculated at the cashier. It’s not on the price tag. With a sales tax of 8.5% after rounding the cost is $2:17 for a sticker price of $2 or $1.99

    I even doubt that Bryson wrote that as it wouldn’t make sense to Americans.


    that was so infuriating in the states...


    but at least you know how much you are getting screwed on sales tax.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,126 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    Somebody please explain that potato thing to me.

    99% water and 1%solid =100kg

    But surely we don't know where the weight is stored? Like the 1% solid is 1kg? Or 10kg of it?

    And if 98% water and 2% solid... wouldn't it stay the same if the solid weighed 1kg?

    I'm lost where 50 comes from.

    Unless the solid is weightless ? Or something...

    https://medium.com/i-math/matt-damon-s-martian-potatoes-1bcde7c6f77d

    https://www.quora.com/A-100-gram-potato-is-99-water-If-it-dries-to-become-98-water-it-will-weigh-only-50-grams-This-is-because-the-solid-portion-of-the-potato-now-accounts-for-2-of-the-mass-Is-the-potato-paradox-true-or-is-the-math-wrong

    The first link has pictures. The second has a nice explanation.


  • Registered Users Posts: 208 ✭✭brainfreeze


    Somebody please explain that potato thing to me.

    99% water and 1%solid =100kg

    But surely we don't know where the weight is stored? Like the 1% solid is 1kg? Or 10kg of it?

    And if 98% water and 2% solid... wouldn't it stay the same if the solid weighed 1kg?

    I'm lost where 50 comes from.

    Unless the solid is weightless ? Or something...

    I felt like limmy trying to understand a kilogram of feathers when working this out too.

    This video helped me.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcXpbhV2oeI


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 16,287 Mod ✭✭✭✭quickbeam


    I love counter-intuitive maths stuff like that. Like the Monty Hall problem which never intuitively seems like changing your mind doubles your chances of winning, but the maths proves it does.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,197 ✭✭✭SuperS54


    Somebody please explain that potato thing to me.

    99% water and 1%solid =100kg

    But surely we don't know where the weight is stored? Like the 1% solid is 1kg? Or 10kg of it?

    And if 98% water and 2% solid... wouldn't it stay the same if the solid weighed 1kg?

    I'm lost where 50 comes from.

    Unless the solid is weightless ? Or something...

    The problem is not correctly described, it should 99% water and 1% solid by weight.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,863 ✭✭✭mikhail


    SuperS54 wrote: »
    The problem is not correctly described, it should 99% water and 1% solid by weight.
    The problem is unsolvable with only the given information if you assume it means anything else. It also doesn't specify it's in a 1g gravitational field, but you can make a few assumptions if you're not being thick about it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 40,154 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    All this talk of wet and dry spuds has reminded of a thing called the potato paradox (it's not really a paradox, but it adds to it's allure to call it one!)

    It goes something like this -

    You buy a bag of spuds, it weighs 100kg. They are mostly water, as spuds tend to be, in fact these particular spuds are 99% water. Being the gormless spud muncher you are, you forget to tie the bag properly and they lose some moisture, it's not the end of the world though they're still 98% water.

    The question is what do they now weigh?

    Answer is they now weigh 50KG. The "paradox" really just shows how badly we tend to handle ratios mentally.
    SuperS54 wrote: »
    The problem is not correctly described, it should 99% water and 1% solid by weight.


    The original post was pretty clear without saying exactly what you said.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    SuperS54 wrote: »
    The problem is not correctly described, it should 99% water and 1% solid by weight.

    To stand up in a court of law probably.... but for a bit of craic on the internet I reckon you can live with the weight bit being implied, seeing as the question was all about weight!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    quickbeam wrote: »
    I love counter-intuitive maths stuff like that. Like the Monty Hall problem which never intuitively seems like changing your mind doubles your chances of winning, but the maths proves it does.

    On the same theme, in the e.g. Euromillions lotto draws, it's logical to say every ball has the same equal chance to be drawn. It's generally hard to argue any differently.

    On the other hand, the 'Law of Large Numbers' may carry some influence on selections (P<0.5), which is precisely why I choose number 33 as a single hotpick (10/1) item for Tuesdays draw...


  • Registered Users Posts: 208 ✭✭brainfreeze


    New Home wrote: »
    1R1pYSA.jpg

    This is also why Dave Chapelle had a hard 10 years after leaving the Chapelle show.

    Comedy Central is owned by Viacom. When he broke his 50 million contract and refused to do another season, Viacom informed the other "big five" not touch Chappelle.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,480 ✭✭✭Chancer3001


    I understand but don't get the probability thingy some times.

    Like say for example heads or tails the chance is 50 50.

    Toss it 10 times , 5ish should be heads. 5ish tails.

    100 times 50 heads ish , 50 tails ish.

    So say for example I'm doing 100 tosses , and I'm 60 in. And 58 have been heads..only 2 tails.

    SURELY you'd be expecting a few more tails to come up soon to balance it out over the 100. But no. There's still the same chance that heads will come up


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,824 ✭✭✭✭Realt Dearg Sec


    I understand but don't get the probability thingy some times.

    Like say for example heads or tails the chance is 50 50.

    Toss it 10 times , 5ish should be heads. 5ish tails.

    100 times 50 heads ish , 50 tails ish.

    So say for example I'm doing 100 tosses , and I'm 60 in. And 58 have been heads..only 2 tails.

    SURELY you'd be expecting a few more tails to come up soon to balance it out over the 100. But no. There's still the same chance that heads will come up
    Yeah the following is my understanding of it, happy to be corrected:
    it's more likely that you'll get fifty heads and fifty tails in any order than the idea that you'll get a hundred tails. But it's exactly equally likely that you'll get a hundred tails as that you'll get heads on every even throw and tails on every odd throw. No particular sequence of outcomes is likely. A hundred tails only referred to a single possible sequence, there's only one way it could happen. There are a huge (but finite) number of sequences that could lead to a fifty fifty outcome. So fifty fifty is more likely (in fact the most likely overall because it has more possible sequences than any other ratio).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    I understand but don't get the probability thingy some times.

    Like say for example heads or tails the chance is 50 50.
    Toss it 10 times , 5ish should be heads. 5ish tails.

    Nope, far too small a sample group, any possible result from 32 combinations is equally possible from 5 throws.
    So say for example I'm doing 100 tosses , and I'm 60 in. And 58 have been heads..only 2 tails.

    SURELY you'd be expecting a few more tails to come up soon to balance it out over the 100. But no. There's still the same chance that heads will come up

    100 is still slightly too small, try with 1,000+ and you'd more likely get close to 50:50 (+/-5). The Law of Large Numbers only applies to very 'large' numbers sets/samples. In reality the probability might only offer 0.5circa (%) P (percent) edge, but it's still an edge.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 16,287 Mod ✭✭✭✭quickbeam


    On the same theme, in the e.g. Euromillions lotto draws, it's logical to say every ball has the same equal chance to be drawn. It's generally hard to argue any differently.

    On the other hand, the 'Law of Large Numbers' may carry some influence on selections (P<0.5), which is precisely why I choose number 33 as a single hotpick (10/1) item for Tuesdays draw...

    Another one is Benford's Law. You'd think that of all the numbers in the world, they'd all have an equal likelihood of appearing in everyday life. Eg, the 10,000 numbers between 1 and 10,000 should all have a 1 in 10,000 chance of appearing, ie the number 1,899 would have the same chance as the number 8,199 (say).

    But no, Benford's Law states that numbers beginning with lower digits have a far higher chance of appearing than those of lower digits. 1,899 more often than 8,199. But 18,990 also more often than 8,199.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,995 ✭✭✭Ipso


    quickbeam wrote: »
    Another one is Benford's Law. You'd think that of all the numbers in the world, they'd all have an equal likelihood of appearing in everyday life. Eg, the 10,000 numbers between 1 and 10,000 should all have a 1 in 10,000 chance of appearing, ie the number 1,899 would have the same chance as the number 8,199 (say).

    But no, Benford's Law states that numbers beginning with lower digits have a far higher chance of appearing than those of lower digits. 1,899 more often than 8,199. But 18,990 also more often than 8,199.

    Isn't that only when Venus in the perihelion of Capricorn?


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,306 Mod ✭✭✭✭mzungu


    The latest match to start at a tennis grand slam even took place earlier today at the well past bedtime hour of 00:20. The match between eighteenth-seeded Spaniard Garbiñe Muguruza and British hopeful Johanna Konta could have been moved to another court earlier but there was lots of seagull poo on that court and not enough ground staff left at the venue to clean it up. A great match but Muguruza took it in three sets 6-4 6-7 (3-7) 7-5 with the final shot of the match taking place at 03:12.

    https://twitter.com/bbctennis/status/1085889267279118336?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1085889267279118336&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fdeadspin.com%2Fajax%2Finset%2Fiframe%3Fid%3Dtwitter-1085889267279118336%26autosize%3D1

    However, this is not the latest finish in the Australian Open, that honour goes to Lleyton Hewitt and Marcos Baghdatis who started their 2008 third round match at 23:47 and five sets later Hewitt was the victor (4-6, 7-5, 7-5, 6-7 (7-4), 6-3) as both men fell off the court at the ungodly hour 04:34!!!


  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 76,366 Mod ✭✭✭✭New Home


    rOqr9Dd.jpg


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,847 ✭✭✭764dak


    I understand but don't get the probability thingy some times.

    Like say for example heads or tails the chance is 50 50.

    Toss it 10 times , 5ish should be heads. 5ish tails.

    100 times 50 heads ish , 50 tails ish.

    So say for example I'm doing 100 tosses , and I'm 60 in. And 58 have been heads..only 2 tails.

    SURELY you'd be expecting a few more tails to come up soon to balance it out over the 100. But no. There's still the same chance that heads will come up

    Coin flips are independent events.
    You can think of it like this:
    Let's say you started flipping coins at 5 p.m. and you have gone 70 heads and 30 tails. Someone uses a memory eraser to make you forget everything after 5 p.m. The person then asks you the percentage of getting heads on the next coin flip. You would say 50%.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,732 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Coin toss non-randomness

    If the coin is tossed and caught, it has about a 51% chance of landing on the same face it was launched.

    If the coin is spun, rather than tossed, it can have a much-larger-than-50% chance of ending with the heavier side down. Spun coins can exhibit "huge bias" (some spun coins will fall tails-up 80% of the time).

    If the coin is tossed and allowed to clatter to the floor, this probably adds randomness. But if then spins the spinning bias probably comes into play.


    A coin will land on its edge around 1 in 6000 throws,

    The same initial coin-flipping conditions produce the same coin flip result. That is, there's a certain amount of determinism to the coin flip.


    A more robust coin toss (more revolutions) decreases the bias.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,732 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    ^^^^
    https://econ.ucsb.edu/~doug/240a/Coin%20Flip.htm

    Some Tips because it's not 50:50

    Always be the chooser, if possible.

    Always be the tosser, *sniggers*

    Don't allow the same person to both toss and choose. Unless, of course, that person is you.

    If the coin is being tossed, and you're the chooser, always choose the side that's initially face down.

    If you are the tosser but not the chooser, sometimes invert the coin into your other palm after catching, and sometimes don't.

    If the coin is being spun rather than tossed, always choose whichever side is lightest.

    Never under any circumstances agree to a coin spin if you're not the chooser.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 18,625 ✭✭✭✭BaZmO*


    New Home wrote: »
    rOqr9Dd.jpg

    “Freuchen was married three times. He was first married in 1911 to Navarana Mequpaluk (d. 1921), an Inuit woman who died in the Spanish Flu epidemic after bearing two children (a boy named Mequsaq Avataq Igimaqssusuktoranguapaluk (1916 - c. 1962) and a girl named Pipaluk Jette Tukuminguaq Kasaluk Palika Hager (1918–1999)[2]).”

    Imagine calling them in for their dinner!


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,558 ✭✭✭✭Fourier


    Regarding probabilities it's much easier when you consider that probabilities are in our heads.

    Like a coin toss having 50:50 odds just means you would bet equal amounts on heads or tails. The coin is just going to land whatever way it does based on how it is thrown. If you looked closly at the flipping device at the start of a throw and analysed it you might change that to 90:10, meaning you'd bet nine times more on heads. Even though nothing has changed about the coin.

    So the 50:50 has nothing to do with the coin, just your betting confidence of it. So there's no reason the coin would balance out tosses to ensure a 50:50 ratio.

    This is easier to see with the weather. Say a 37% chance of rain in the first week of March is given. This basically means if you were offered a ticket that gave you a euro if it rained that week, you'd pay 37 cents for it. However the weather doesn't care how humans bet on it and could easily rain in the first week of March every year.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    I understand but don't get the probability thingy some times.

    Like say for example heads or tails the chance is 50 50.

    Toss it 10 times , 5ish should be heads. 5ish tails.

    100 times 50 heads ish , 50 tails ish.

    So say for example I'm doing 100 tosses , and I'm 60 in. And 58 have been heads..only 2 tails.

    SURELY you'd be expecting a few more tails to come up soon to balance it out over the 100. But no. There's still the same chance that heads will come up

    My take on it is that the coin toss is just an analogy, you shouldn't take it literally to mean a particular coin, tossed a particular number of times, in a particular way - when narrowed down like that it becomes too easy to influence either intentionally or otherwise. For example you may purely by chance flip it with enough force to turn it a certain number of times most of the time and so skew the results. If it was truly random, then yes it would be 50:50, but a person with a coin will never be anything like truly random.

    But the law holds through over bigger quantities - get a million people, to toss a million coins, a million times and the results will be pretty close to 50:50. The higher the number of times you do this the closer you'll get to the magic 50:50 as any anomalies get cancelled out by dilution and by opposing anomalies.

    A variation of it is a thing called the gamblers fallacy - in a random game say like betting on black or red in roulette - you see say 5 reds in a row and you're fairly certain the next one is bound to be black and stick the mortgage money on it - but in reality it's no more or less likely than any other time it just "feels" like it should be. The previous result doesn't effect the next, they just tend to average out over large numbers of results.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,449 ✭✭✭blastman


    Despite appearing in a movie called Another Fine Mess, Oliver Hardy never says the phrase "Here's another fine mess you've gotten me into..." in any Laurel & Hardy film. The actual phrase used was "Here's another nice mess you've gotten me into..." and it was used in approximately 15 of their movies, including the aforementioned Another Fine Mess.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Fourier wrote: »
    So the 50:50 has nothing to do with the coin, just your betting confidence of it. So there's no reason the coin would balance out tosses to ensure a 50:50 ratio.

    The coin (over 'large' datasets) does indeed average out very close to 50:50.
    Many (slow, boring) trials have already been done to support it such as:

    eJAvaGN.png

    Yes at the start there may be some slight 'throw technique bias' and random anomolies (e.g. only 8% avg to be 50:50 by the 1st 100 throws), but over time ('000's) these things all balance out. The ying-yang or law of large numbers reigns.

    Below also is the Irish lotto results each ball averaging about the 180 frequency (ignore 46-47 they were added on recently). This is for main draw only, not plus draws which further empahsises the point. Not always (more variables than coin flip), but more often than not the lotto balls will average out.

    bpRlNG1.png


  • Registered Users Posts: 959 ✭✭✭Conchir


    Conchir wrote: »
    Yep, plenty of these. Another is Margaritifera margaritifera, the freshwater pearl mussel.

    Freshwater pearl mussel is Ireland’s longest-lived animal, capable of living up to 130 years, and with the oldest confirmed example over 200 years (though not an Irish specimen).


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,193 ✭✭✭TomSweeney


    Ipso wrote: »
    Sometimes I wonder about the mind set of the people who wrote this kind of stuff.
    You worship a god who created the entire universe; from the nebulae, black holes, raging waterfalls to humming bird wings and all the microscopic detail but somehow he gets upset by a dog or beard length or mixing fabrics of clothing.


    I know, also gets really upset over what 2 grown men do with their penises ... extraordinary !


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,126 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    New Home wrote: »
    rOqr9Dd.jpg

    There's also this guy. jack Churchill. here's some snippets from his wiki page. Sounds completely crazy :D
    Churchill left the army in 1936 and worked as a newspaper editor in Nairobi, Kenya, and as a male model.[14][unreliable source?] He used his archery and bagpipe talents to play a small role in the 1924 film, The Thief of Bagdad[15] and also appeared in the 1938 film, A Yank at Oxford.[14][unreliable source?] He took second place in the 1938 military piping competition at the Aldershot Tattoo.[14][unreliable source?] In 1939, he represented Great Britain at the World Archery Championships in Oslo
    n May 1940, Churchill and some of his men ambushed a German patrol near L'Épinette (near Richebourg, Pas-de-Calais). Churchill gave the signal to attack by raising his claymore. Jack managed to start the ambush by killing one of the Germans with his longbow, proceeded by his men opening fire on the remaining Germans. After fighting at Dunkirk, he volunteered for the Commandos

    btw, this is a good point to mention that he carried a long bow, claymore and bagpipes into battle.
    Churchill was second in command of No. 3 Commando in Operation Archery, a raid on the German garrison at Vågsøy, Norway, on 27 December 1941.[19] As the ramps fell on the first landing craft, he leapt forward from his position playing "March of the Cameron Men"[20] on his bagpipes, before throwing a grenade and charging into battle. For his actions at Dunkirk and Vågsøy, Churchill received the Military Cross and Bar.
    In July 1943, as commanding officer, he led 2 Commando from their landing site at Catania in Sicily with his trademark Scottish broadsword slung around his waist, a longbow and arrows around his neck and his bagpipes under his arm,[21] which he also did in the landings at Salerno.

    Leading 2 Commando, Churchill was ordered to capture a German observation post outside the town of Molina [it; nl], controlling a pass leading down to the Salerno beachhead.[22] With the help of a corporal, he infiltrated the town and captured the post, taking 42 prisoners including a mortar squad. Churchill led the men and prisoners back down the pass, with the wounded being carried on carts pushed by German prisoners. He commented that it was "an image from the Napoleonic Wars."[22] He received the Distinguished Service Order for leading this action at Salerno.[23]

    Churchill later walked back to the town to retrieve his sword, which he had lost in hand-to-hand combat with the German regiment. On his way there, he encountered a disoriented American patrol mistakenly walking towards enemy lines. When the NCO in command of the patrol refused to turn around, Churchill told them that he was going his own way and that he wouldn't come back for a "bloody third time"
    The following morning, one flanking attack was launched by 43 Commando with Churchill leading the elements from 40 Commando. The Partisans remained at the landing area. Only Churchill and six others managed to reach the objective. A mortar shell killed or wounded everyone but Churchill, who was playing "Will Ye No Come Back Again?" on his pipes as the Germans advanced. He was knocked unconscious by grenades and captured.[25] He was later flown to Berlin for interrogation and then transferred to Sachsenhausen concentration camp.[26]

    In September 1944, Churchill and a Royal Air Force officer, Bertram James, crawled under the wire, through an abandoned drain, and attempted to walk to the Baltic coast. They were captured near the German coastal city of Rostock, a few kilometres from the sea.

    In late April 1945, Churchill and about 140 other prominent concentration camp inmates were transferred to Tyrol, guarded by SS troops.[27] A delegation of prisoners told senior German army officers they feared they would be executed. A German army unit commanded by Captain Wichard von Alvensleben moved in to protect the prisoners. Outnumbered, the SS guards moved out, leaving the prisoners behind.[27] The prisoners were released and, after the departure of the Germans, Churchill walked 150 kilometres (93 mi) to Verona, Italy, where he met an American armoured unit
    Australia and surfing
    In later years, Churchill served as an instructor at the land-air warfare school in Australia, where he became a passionate devotee of the surfboard. Back in Britain, he was the first man to ride the River Severn's five-foot tidal bore and designed his own board.[26] During this time back in Britain, he worked at a desk job in the army.[14][unreliable source?]

    Retirement (1959–1996)
    He retired from the army in 1959, with two awards of the Distinguished Service Order. In retirement, his eccentricity continued. He startled train conductors and passengers by throwing his briefcase out of the train window each day on the ride home. He later explained that he was tossing his case into his own back garden so he would not have to carry it from the station.[26] He also enjoyed sailing coal-fired ships on the Thames and playing with radio-controlled model warships

    He's one of those guys who sounds like he was created by a fiction writer.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,321 ✭✭✭Gloomtastic!


    Luciano Pavarotti performed his first concert outside of Italy in 1963 in Dundalk, Ireland for the St Cecilia's Gramophone Society.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 124 ✭✭anotherfinemess


    Fr_Dougal wrote: »
    How?



    Can you give a little bit more info please?

    You cut a little square from the teabag paper, you use a tiny little piece of nail glue to stick it like a bandaid over the broken part of the nail, and you use a gentle file/buffer over it to blend it into the natural nail. Paint over it with a coat of two of base coat/top coat/colour
    Oh you meant that kind of nail. Thanks for the explanation, my poor mind was quite boggled


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement